Opinion
6:24-cv-385-JSS-LHP
05-24-2024
FALLS LAKE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. INDICAR OF DAYTONA INC., DAYTONA KIA, DAYTONA MITSUBISHI, INDICOM INC., THEODORE FOSTER and JOYCE NIEVES, AS PR FOR THE ESTATE OF KATWAINA BROWN, Defendants
ORDER
LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motions for Clerk's defaults against Defendants Theodore Foster, Daytona Mitsubishi, Daytona Kia, Indicar of Daytona, Inc., and Indicom, Inc. Doc. Nos. 35-39. Upon review, the motions are due to be denied without prejudice.
As an initial matter, none of the motions comply with Local Rule 3.01(g), despite the appearance of at least one Defendant in this case. See Doc. No. 25; Local Rule 3.01(g). The motions also fail to comply with Local Rule 3.01(a) because they do not include memoranda of legal authority in support. See Doc. Nos. 35-39. Relatedly, the motions fail to adequately address, with citation to legal authority, that service of process on Defendants was proper. See generally United States v. Donald, No. 3:09-cv-147-J-32HTS, 2009 WL 1810357, at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 24, 2009) (before a Clerk's default can be entered against a defendant, the Court must determine that the defendant was properly served). Specifically, Plaintiff fails to address how service on Defendants Daytona Mitsubishi, Daytona Kia, Indicar of Daytona, Inc. and Indicom, Inc. by serving “Tom Pelchen” as “General Manager -Authorized” was sufficient to effect proper service under governing law. See Doc. Nos. 17-20; see also Doc. Nos. 36-39. And Plaintiff's request for Clerk's default against Theodore Foster is based on a document titled, “Non-Enforceable Return of Service,” with no explanation from Plaintiff. See Doc. Nos. 26, 35.
Accordingly, each of the motions (Doc. Nos. 35-39) is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall renew its requests for Clerk's default within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, which request(s) must fully comply with the Local Rules, address the issues outlined in this Order, and include a memorandum of legal authority establishing that service of process on the Defendant(s) was proper under applicable law.